Would like start a list of candidates that the board supports. Here are some of my ideas:

Larry Izzo
Scotty Walden
Major Applewhite (possibly too much baggage, wonder if you all agree)
KC Keeler
Lincoln Riley

Kurt Roper
Jeremy Bates
Drew Mehringer
Mike Shannon
Bob Shoop
Doug Meacham
Todd Orlando

Haven't we had enough of these types of threads?

Drew Mehringer. Rutgers not good this year (shocking, right?!?), but his pedigree is impeccable and he is an alum. If Rutgers had been decent this year, he probably would have already been priced out of Rice's market.

Kurt Roper. Because I like alums.

Someone youngish, but not all that young, that none of us think about. Seems to be JK's MO.

I would be more interested in discussing potential defensive coordinators and schemes. We won't go anywhere meaningful if we keep giving up 500+ yards of offense to opposing teams.

Here's my two cents. As opposed to a specific individual I'd like to have a list of 3-5 of the most important qualities we should look for in the next head coach. And IMO we should base that on what works here at RICE. Since we all admit its a special situation with challenges and advantages that are never going to change.


in no particular order

A tough taskmaster type. I think if you look at other Coaches that have had success at Rice it's been the type that really challenges the players. Which makes sense because of the type of student athlete we have. These kids want to be challenged that why they come to Rice.

A Coach that for whatever reason will want to stay after the program has success. This is where a alum or someone with a Rice connection has real merit.

Someone that has a proven record of success. At SOMETHING. These days the HC of a College football team is more of a CEO than a simple coach.
And with 8 years before the next big realignment shift we have 1 maybe 2 chances to get it right. ( if choice 1 lasts only 3 years) which could be BAD. Unless we have a serious uptick and the Coach leaves ( which is why #2 is so important) we need to find a Coach that will want to stay.

Someone that can excel at letting others succeed. The job is too big for one man. We need someone that is comfortable surrounding themselves with assistants that might be smarter than them.

This last one wont make some of you happy. Id like to see a return to the option offense . Id rather have the BEST option players running the offense . Than the down ballot options we can get here running the same offense as everyone else.

(11-07-2016 12:58 PM)THRILL Wrote:  Here's my two cents. As opposed to a specific individual I'd like to have a list of 3-5 of the most important qualities we should look for in the next head coach. And IMO we should base that on what works here at RICE. Since we all admit its a special situation with challenges and advantages that are never going to change.
in no particular order
A tough taskmaster type. I think if you look at other Coaches that have had success at Rice it's been the type that really challenges the players. Which makes sense because of the type of student athlete we have. These kids want to be challenged that why they come to Rice.
A Coach that for whatever reason will want to stay after the program has success. This is where a alum or someone with a Rice connection has real merit.
Someone that has a proven record of success. At SOMETHING. These days the HC of a College football team is more of a CEO than a simple coach.
And with 8 years before the next big realignment shift we have 1 maybe 2 chances to get it right. ( if choice 1 lasts only 3 years) which could be BAD. Unless we have a serious uptick and the Coach leaves ( which is why #2 is so important) we need to find a Coach that will want to stay.
Someone that can excel at letting others succeed. The job is too big for one man. We need someone that is comfortable surrounding themselves with assistants that might be smarter than them.
This last one wont make some of you happy. Id like to see a return to the option offense . Id rather have the BEST option players running the offense . Than the down ballot options we can get here running the same offense as everyone else.

Responding to your points, which I think are well thought out:

Tough taskmaster - absolutely essential; time to get rid of the country club
Stay after the program succeeds - couldn't possibly care less
Proved record of success - absolutely; particularly in situations that involve doing less with more
Excel at letting others succeed - yes, but I'm not sure how you measure that in a hiring context
Return to option - I couldn't care less what offense we run; I want somebody who is going to make us play defense and take advantage of the kicking game; two advantages that I (and the service academies) see with the option are 1) it's not something that opponents see often, so it's a preparation challenge, particularly with only a week to work, and 2) you basically lengthen a short personnel bench, because the skills on one side of the ball generally transfer to the other more easily than with other schemes

Some names that I would like to see considered:

Ivin Jasper
Alex Grinch
KC Keeler
Randy Shannon
Osia Lewis

I doubt we can get Jasper away from Annapolis.

Beau Baldwin - Eastern Washington

He at least knows how to develop quarterbacks. And his teams play with abandon. That might not be what we need, but he is definitely a good coach.

Eastern Washington beat Washington State this year (yes, top-25 Leach-led Wazzu) and has a single loss to FCS king NDSU.

(11-07-2016 03:33 PM)Wiessman Wrote:  Beau Baldwin - Eastern Washington

He at least knows how to develop quarterbacks. And his teams play with abandon. That might not be what we need, but he is definitely a good coach.

Eastern Washington beat Washington State this year (yes, top-25 Leach-led Wazzu) and has a single loss to FCS king NDSU.

He did a great job with Bo Levi Mitchell who played at Katy and then for June Jones at SMU before going to EWU. He is the starting QB for Calgary in the CFL and already holds a number of team and league records.

Kendal Briles.

(11-07-2016 04:00 PM)Hymie Weiss Wrote:  Kendal Briles.

Worst idea, maybe ever.

We're not going for someone that unethical. Todd Graham was as close as we would ever get, and that was way too close.

I want a defensive-minded coach more than an offensive guru. Or if its going to be 's offensive guru, at least one who believes in having a strong defense. Our defense is worse than our offense (hard as that may be to believe), and we are not going to get better as long as we are that bad on defense.

Jerry Berndt's teams led the SWC in total offense but were so bad defensively that they couldn't win a conference game (or any game, his last year). That's where we are headed until we fix our defense.

(11-07-2016 04:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I want a defensive-minded coach more than an offensive guru. Or if its going to be 's offensive guru, at least one who believes in having a strong defense. Our defense is worse than our offense (hard as that may be to believe), and we are not going to get better as long as we are that bad on defense.

Jerry Berndt's teams led the SWC in total offense but were so bad defensively that they couldn't win a conference game (or any game, his last year). That's where we are headed until we fix our defense.

EWU relies on offensive fireworks, but it also has a serviceable defense. I would trust Baldwin to bring in good defensive minds if he were to come to Rice.

I don't want Baldwin so we can break the scoreboard; I just think he knows what he is doing period.

(11-07-2016 04:08 PM)Wiessman Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 04:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I want a defensive-minded coach more than an offensive guru. Or if its going to be 's offensive guru, at least one who believes in having a strong defense. Our defense is worse than our offense (hard as that may be to believe), and we are not going to get better as long as we are that bad on defense.
Jerry Berndt's teams led the SWC in total offense but were so bad defensively that they couldn't win a conference game (or any game, his last year). That's where we are headed until we fix our defense.

EWU relies on offensive fireworks, but it also has a serviceable defense. I would trust Baldwin to bring in good defensive minds if he were to come to Rice.
I don't want Baldwin so we can break the scoreboard; I just think he knows what he is doing period.

The last time we were this bad, we tried every offensive guru available--Homer Rice, Watson Brown, Jerry Berndt. It wasn't until we got a defensive guy--Fred Goldsmith--that we showed any real improvement.

Well, Bailiff was supposedly a defense-first guy, and that was doomed from the start.

So you're essentially saying that we need a defense-first coach that has a reputation for getting his teams to execute and minimize mistakes. I can get on board with that.

But I still think good coaches are good coaches. Spurrier went to SCar and emphasized defense out of necessity. Adjustments can and will be made when necessary by the truly talented.

I think the 'offensive' or 'defensive' guy can be overplayed.

The head coach doesn't do as much 'coaching' per se.

I want a guy who knows what he's good at and is good at finding those to do what he isn't. I want a guy who will look at what he has and find the best combination to make it work. If you can recruit a ton of guys who are 5'11 180-210 lbs, then run a defense AND an offense that doesn't need guys who are 6'2 220-240. YES, that includes the bone, but doesn't preclude others.

Russell Wilson is 5'11
Drew Brees is 6'0

Neither of them run anything like the 'bone.

Teddy Bridgewater, Andy Dalton, Aaron Rodgers, Dak Prescott all 6'2

What I want is a coach that knows the rules inside and out...

Chip Kelley is considered an offensive genius, so what does he do? 7 seconds before the half and New Orleans on the 13, he instructs his players to intentionally hold ALL of the Saint receivers, knowing that the clock will run and that he will give only a 5 yard penalty... and there won't be a TD opportunity... unless they're going to 'go for it' from the 8. I don't know if that was HIS idea, or if he hired someone with that idea, but that is what i want.

A guy who on 4th and goal on the 1 foot line on defense knows that 'being offside' is only a 6 inch penalty... but being late off the ball is a touchdown... AND a guy who knows that being offside in that situation on offense is a DEATH sentence. That holding 'away from the play' is a killer.

A guy who instills that knowledge into his coaches and players... so that if he says later... HOLD THEM... they know he doesn't mean grab them and let them go. He means 'take the penalty'.

I know that guy.

(11-07-2016 04:49 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I think the 'offensive' or 'defensive' guy can be overplayed.

I agree. 69/70/75 offers his perspective below.

(11-07-2016 04:49 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  A guy who instills that knowledge into his coaches and players... so that if he says later... HOLD THEM... they know he doesn't mean grab them and let them go. He means 'take the penalty'.

Some guy named John Wooden once said something to the effect of, "I don't coach during games. My players should already know what to do."

When you have student-athletes as sharp as Alcindor and Walton, I guess not-coaching becomes just that much easier.

(11-07-2016 04:22 PM)Wiessman Wrote:  Well, Bailiff was supposedly a defense-first guy, and that was doomed from the start.
So you're essentially saying that we need a defense-first coach that has a reputation for getting his teams to execute and minimize mistakes. I can get on board with that.
But I still think good coaches are good coaches. Spurrier went to SCar and emphasized defense out of necessity. Adjustments can and will be made when necessary by the truly talented.

I think the execution and minimizing mistakes part is more important than defense/offense. I don't think Bailiff has ever been known for doing those things (the opposite, AFAIK). That's why I list Jasper first, although he is an offensive guy. And Navy is not exceptional defensively, but they find a way to be good enough to win. Keeler is not a defensive guy either, but he knows how to put a complete program together. He's won year in and year out (which Bailiff did not) at two separate stops. Yes, both are FCS, but the different is that he sustained and maintained whereas Bailiff has not.

I did not list RUOwls. If the AD is willing to roll the dice that way, I'm 100% supportive. But I'm trying to list more guys that I think he has a reasonable shot at actually looking at.

(11-07-2016 04:49 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I think the 'offensive' or 'defensive' guy can be overplayed.

The head coach doesn't do as much 'coaching' per se.

I know that guy.

I don't think which side of the ball is as important as making sure they emphasize the D side. I know plenty of offensive guys who can do that, and I think the guy you know would be one of them.

I'm of the belief that offense sells tickets, defense wins games, and the kicking game wins championships (because the kicking game decides many of the close games that you need to win to win a championship). So we need an offense that will sell tickets, a defense that will win games, and a kicking game that will win championships. And to be clear, by kicking game I mean all phases of special teams--snaps, protection, coverage, returns--not just the kickers themselves. It's absurd to have kickers the quality of Martens and Boswell and not bring the rest of the kicking game up to their level. The kicking game is the fastest place that we can level the field with those who have more talent overall.

One of the defining moments of the Bailiff era was a game against Tulsa where we were trailing but not yet out of it. We scored a TD. Tulsa blocked the PAT and returned it for 2 points. Then they returned the ensuing kickoff for a TD. So we scored a TD and fell 3 points further behind as a result. After that, we just collapsed. That's probably an extreme example, but that's the kind of stuff that killed us multiple times.

(11-07-2016 05:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-07-2016 04:22 PM)Wiessman Wrote:  Well, Bailiff was supposedly a defense-first guy, and that was doomed from the start.
So you're essentially saying that we need a defense-first coach that has a reputation for getting his teams to execute and minimize mistakes. I can get on board with that.
But I still think good coaches are good coaches. Spurrier went to SCar and emphasized defense out of necessity. Adjustments can and will be made when necessary by the truly talented.

I think the execution and minimizing mistakes part is more important than defense/offense. I don't think Bailiff has ever been known for doing those things (the opposite, AFAIK). That's why I list Jasper first, although he is an offensive guy. And Navy is not exceptional defensively, but they find a way to be good enough to win. Keeler is not a defensive guy either, but he knows how to put a complete program together. He's won year in and year out (which Bailiff did not) at two separate stops. Yes, both are FCS, but the different is that he sustained and maintained whereas Bailiff has not.

I did not list RUOwls. If the AD is willing to roll the dice that way, I'm 100% supportive. But I'm trying to list more guys that I think he has a reasonable shot at actually looking at.

Well Navy's offense is a pseudo defense in a way. In the ND game this past weekend ND had 2 possessions in the 2nd half and 6 possessions the entire game. Navy got the ball back with 7:28 to go and never gave it back. Easy to play good defense when the offense dominates TOP!

My only concern with your comment, Jacket is that the emphasis can still be on the wrong things. The key to Navy's success is that not only do they dominate TOP, but they frequently score and they don't often give up the big play on defense.

If you can't do those other things, then TOP doesn't matter. Baylor, WKU, UH, La Tech and many others are perfectly happy to let you run the clock and then stifle you in the red zone... and then score in 15 seconds.

That's actually not a bad model... to force teams into long drives counting on them to make a mistake at some point... a penalty... an errant throw... a fumble... and then come after them hard when you get the extra defender (the end line, so less need for safety help)